My friend was a victim of identity theft in GermanyStarted by victravis , Jul 18 2013 12:01 AMPlease log in to reply9 replies to this topicPosted 18 July 2013 - 12:01 AMHello,

my friend was a victim of identity theft in Germany but no one German lawyer agreed to handle the case.

My friend lived in Germany when German weekly Bild stated that private information of German Jews werestolen from classified files of German secret service and transfered to Iranian Embassy. In the mentioned article Bild pointed aslo who were perpetrators of this crime. My friend awaited for any investigation prescribed by German law was made by German authorities but failed.So he left Germany since he felt his personal security was compromised.

Several years have passed and now those persons from Bild article were found guilty in other crimes and even murders in Germany.

Is my friend able to file a lawsuit against Bild or other party and demand for compensation for moral and material damage in Federal court in USA?

163 postsPosted 18 July 2013 - 04:11 AMIs my friend able to file a lawsuit against Bild or other party and demand for compensation for moral and material damage in Federal court in USA?

Based on what you have posted, no. There would be no jurisdiction over the parties for the court to have any authority to do anything. I see no cause of action against Bild, they have done nothing wrong. American courts do not compensate for moral damage and if several years have passed, you could have a problem with the statute of limitations, even if you could bring the action in the United States.Posted 18 July 2013 - 08:07 AMDid you friend suffer any damages as a result of this theft?42,042 postsPosted 18 July 2013 - 10:15 AMMy friend lived in Germany when German weekly Bild stated that private information of German Jews werestolen. . . .

I'm not sure what this means. If I remember my high school German correctly, "Bild" is the German word for picture. How can a picture "state" anything? Are you saying that someone painted a picture or took a photograph that conveyed this message?

In the mentioned article Bild pointed aslo who were perpetrators of this crime. My friend awaited for any investigation prescribed by German law was made by German authorities but failed.So he left Germany since he felt his personal security was compromised.

Now you're talking about an article. ??? It's also not clear what your friend's connection to the situation is or why he "felt his personal security was compromised" because some persons allegedly stole some other persons' "private information" and sent it to the Iranian Embassy (which I assume means the Iranian Embassy in Berlin, but it's not clear). All in all, this is a pretty convoluted story, don't you think?

Is my friend able to file a lawsuit against Bild or other party and demand for compensation for moral and material damage in Federal court in USA?

Your friend can file any lawsuit he likes, but any such lawsuit almost certainly would get dismissed within weeks of being filed. First, it's not clear how he might purport to sue a picture ("file a lawsuit against Bild"). Second, if you're talking about a lawsuit based on the article you mentioned, what possible claim do you suppose he might have? You this one didn't suggest anything in the article was untruthful. Third, "any other party" is beyond vague. Fourth, I have no idea what you mean by "moral and material damage." Your post doesn't suggest that your friend suffered any damages of any sort (only that he left Germany and moved to some unstated country), and "moral . . . damage" is not something for which one can recover under U.S. law. Fifth, nothing in your post suggests any connection between the United States or any of the persons or events you mentioned. Why would he sue in the U.S.? Are you supposing that the U.S. federal courts exist to adjudicate matters throughout the world? Does it work the other way? If you and I get in a car accident in Kansas, are you going to sue me in Botswana? That would make no sense and, without any apparent basis for jurisdiction, any such lawsuit would be dismissed almost immediately. Sixth, depending on how many years "several years" is, your friend might have a statute of limitations issue (although, with so many other apparent problems, the case probably would never get to the point that statute of limitations would become an issue).Posted 18 July 2013 - 01:15 PMDid you friend suffer any damages as a result of this theft?

Please take into consideration the following.The secret service agency mentioned in the Bild article is Thuringia Office for theProtection of the Constitution. The article reports about the secret agent calledThomas Dienel who was a Nazi. An officer from the German office for theprotection of the constitution also reported that Thomas Dienel has disclosedpersonal data from German Jews to the embassy of Iran. And it also reportsthat the officer of the government agency thought that this information was meant forterrorists.My friend who lived in Germany is Jewish. So it is clear that he was shocked and panicked by thisBild article which forced him to leave Germany to save his life, and it seems to me that this article is reliable basisfor any claim against Bild or another third party.Then, due to very important disclosures it reveals now that the Government of the Federal State of Thuringia has organizedthe National Socialist Underground - NSU. The members of the terrorist cell committed nine murders of German citizen of Turkishorigin. Such actions can be confidently called state terrorism. The organizers of these murders are those who authorized the transferof German Jews' personal data to embassy of Iran. This crime hasn't been investigated to date and it organizers and perpetrators are unpanishedtill now.42,042 postsPosted 18 July 2013 - 01:57 PMMy friend who lived in Germany is Jewish. So it is clear that he was shocked and panicked by thisBild article which forced him to leave Germany to save his life, and it seems to me that this article is reliable basisfor any claim against Bild or another third party.

This makes no sense.

In your original post, you said your friend was a victim of identity theft. Now, all you appear to be saying is that, because your friend is a Jew (and for no other reason), he got scared and left the country, even though well over 100,000 other Jews didn't feel the need to do so. How is that something on which a lawsuit could be based? You also haven't bothered to explain how any of this has any connection to the United States.

The rest of your post sounds like you're believing a bunch of Internet paranoia a bit too much.163 postsPosted 18 July 2013 - 11:24 PMpg1067--Bild is the name of a german magazine, which when I was in germany was the equivelent of Life magazine in the US.

Nothing the original poster has added would change my opinion that there would be no jurisdiction in US courts for any legal action based upon what has been posted.Posted 19 July 2013 - 01:45 AMto pg1067 and doucar:to bring the case under american jurisdiction we need an appropriate "allegged conduct":

1) German Jews whose personal data had been stolen were and still are in a serious danger.2) The stolen data can be used to fake passports in order to help terrorists to easily enter any country, including USA, Israel and EU as their first enemy targets.3) We hope that the investigation of the facts given in the article will help punish those responsible for this crime.4) We are confident that a precedent must be set to enable further lawsuits against terrorists and their collaborators.5) It is quite possible that the USA will be the next country to suffer from such a personal data theft.6) Axel Springer AG as Bild Zeitung? publisher could be considered as defendants since it has a branch office in the US. Allegged conduct:

Bild didn?t provide the information about the personal data theft to Procurator?s office as prescribed by law.

Woudn't these consideration be regarded as sufficient for American court?

163 postsPosted 19 July 2013 - 04:18 AMNone of the "alleged conduct" occurred in the United States. The courts do not deal with what could have happened, only with what did. Assuming you are correct and Bild was obligated under German law to turn the information over to the prosecutor's office, that breech of law or duty occurred in Germany, not the US. In fact, in the US they would have had no such duty, and US courts would have found no liability on the part of the publisher.Posted 19 July 2013 - 06:55 AMto bring the case under american jurisdiction we need an appropriate "allegged conduct":

1) German Jews whose personal data had been stolen were and still are in a serious danger.2) The stolen data can be used to fake passports in order to help terrorists to easily enter any country, including USA, Israel and EU as their first enemy targets.3) We hope that the investigation of the facts given in the article will help punish those responsible for this crime.4) We are confident that a precedent must be set to enable further lawsuits against terrorists and their collaborators.5) It is quite possible that the USA will be the next country to suffer from such a personal data theft.6) Axel Springer AG as Bild Zeitung? publisher could be considered as defendants since it has a branch office in the US. Allegged conduct:

Bild didn?t provide the information about the personal data theft to Procurator?s office as prescribed by law.

Woudn't these consideration be regarded as sufficient for American court?

One needs more than "appropriate 'allegged [sic] conduct.'" The court needs to have subject matter jurisdiction and personal jurisdiction over the defendants. Subject matter jurisdiction means that the court has the power to decide the type of case at issue. Personal jurisdiction means that, because of some connection between each defendant and the state in which the court sits, that court has the power to require the defendant to come into that court and answer the allegations against him/her/it.

You initially mentioned filing this suit in a U.S. federal court. In the U.S., federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction. That means they may only hear specific types of cases that are enumerated in the Constitution and statutes. In general, U.S. federal courts may only hear cases involving issues of federal constitutional, statutory, or administrative law, or cases involving something called diversity of citizenship. This article ( http://en.wikipedia....ty_jurisdiction ) explains the concept well enough for present purposes.

Additionally, a U.S. federal court may exercise personal jurisdiction to the same extent as a state court sitting in the same state as the federal court. In other words, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York may exercise personal jurisdiction to the same extent as a state court in New York. Most (if not all) U.S. states have courts of general jurisdiction, which means they may hear any type of case, but they still must have personal jurisdiction, which requires some sort of connection between the state and each defendant or the facts on which the claim is based.

With those things in mind, let's look at your claim. As far as I can tell (and you haven't bothered to clarify), your friend's claim would be based on the fact that he freaked out about the publication of an article that had nothing to do with your friend and which described certain criminal activity that also had nothing to do with your friend. Your friend's only "connection" to the subject matter of the story is that the victims of the crime discussed in the story are of the same ethnicity/religion as your friend. That being the case, I cannot discern any cause of action that might be recognized under U.S. federal law or the law of any state. Thus, it is difficult to assess whether any U.S. court might have subject matter jurisdiction. However, it is fairly clear that no cause of action arising under federal law exists. Therefore, the only basis for federal court jurisdiction would be diversity. However, the parties all appear to be German, so no diversity exists.

As far as personal jurisdiction, the only potential defendant you've clearly identified is this magazine, and I can discern no reason to believe that a German magazine that published a story about matters completely unconnected to the United States could be subject to personal jurisdiction in any U.S. state for claims arising out of that story.

Of the 7 points you mentioned above (6 of which are numbered, and the 7th of which is not numbered), 1, 3, and 4 are completely irrelevant to anything, and 2 and 5 are nothing but speculation that the persons involved in the story might do something at some point in the future that might have an impact in the U.S. As the prior response mentioned, the laws in the U.S. are not concerned with speculation about what might happen in the future. The 7th unnumbered point is nothing but an allegation that a German law was violated, which is irrelevant to the issue under discussion. As for your sixth point, a Google search reveals nothing that would support your statement that the magazine's publisher has a branch office in the U.S. However, even if it did, as mentioned several times now, you have yet to articulate a cognizable cause of action.

Finally, there is a doctrine called forum non conveniens, which basically says that, even though a U.S. court might have jurisdiction, it should decline to entertain the matter because it would be inconvenient to do so. Your case is a perfect example. The case involves German parties and an incident that occurred in Germany. All relevant witnesses and evidence are likely to be outside the U.S. and beyond the subpoena power of any U.S. court. This is what we've been saying througout this thread. If there is a legal issue here at all, the case belongs in a German court, not a U.S. court. U.S. courts are already crowded enough; they do not have the capacity to adjudicate cases have no connection whatsoever to the United States.<br>For the original version including any supplementary images or video, visit http://boards.answers.findlaw.com/index.php/topic/226617-my-friend-was-a-victim-of-identity-theft-in-germany/